Share

Above the Fold. Despite warnings from President Obama that there would be “consequences,” North Korea went ahead and launched a ballistic missile to honor the 100th birthday of the country’s founder, Kim Il-sung. The test was a dud; the missile broke up a minute into flight and fell harmlessly into the Yellow Sea west of Seoul. The launch violates a series of UN resolutions and means the end of the so-called Leap Day deal in which Washington promised to send food aid to North Korea in exchange for good behavior. Presumptive GOP nominee Mitt Romney was quick to issue a statement accusing Obama of a “naive” effort to “appease” a regime that “poses a clear and growing threat to the United States, one for which President Obama has no effective response.” But while Romney was crystal clear in his condemnation, he offered no good answer to the one question that matters, “So what would you do?” That might be because there isn’t one. Successive U.S. presidents have tried and failed to corral Pyongyang. That includes George W. Bush, on whose watch North Korea went nuclear and hardly someone who can be accused of appeasing foreign foes. The fact is that North Korea holds Seoul hostage—the twenty-five million people who live in the South Korean capital live within range of North Korean artillery and missiles—making Washington understandably reluctant to risk war. The one country that has cards to play with Pyongyang is China. But so far Beijing has been unwilling to play them. In the days leading up to the missile launch, Chinese leader Hu Jintao was sending new North Korean leader Kim Jong-un “sincere good wishes for the cause of building a prosperous and strong country.” Don’t expect Chinese leaders to be sending Pyongyang a different message anytime soon. Until that changes, North Korea is going to frustrate American presidents, even ones who question the determination of their predecessors.

Read of the Week. China and the Philippines are currently locked in a tense standoff over the Scarborough Shoal, which lies off the southwest coast of the Philippines. The stand-off started when a Philippine warship tried to arrest the crews of several Chinese fishing boats at anchor in the shoal, which Philippines claims as its territory. The Philippines claims that the Chinese were fishing illegally. The problem is that China also lays claim to the shoal, so it sent two surveillance ships to prevent the arrests. Result: a stand-off with neither side wanting to give an inch. The stare down is just the most recent example of why so many security experts worry about the potential for an armed clash in the South China Sea. It is dotted with thousands of small islands like the Scarborough Shoal, some rich fishing grounds, and potentially vast deposits of oil and gas. So who owns what is a matter not just of national prestige and possibly strategic advantage, but cold hard cash. As Bonnie Glaser points out in “Armed Clash in the South China Sea,” a report just released by CFR’s Center for Preventive Action, China is embroiled in territorial disputes in the South China Sea with Brunei, Malaysia, the Philippines, Taiwan, and Vietnam. America’s traditional principle of freedom of the seas is also at stake, as China insists it can bar ships from sailing in international waters that it claims as its own. Finding a fix that leaves everyone satisfied will be a heavy lift.

Chart of the Week. Does it seem like the price of everything is going up? It may not be your imagination. According to the McKinsey Global Institute, the cost of commodities—everything from oil, coal, and gas to coffee, cocoa, and rice to steel, aluminum, and tin—is up, way up. To put the point even more strongly, the rise in commodity prices over the past decade reversed a one-hundred-year-long fall in commodity prices over the course of the twentieth century. This is what happens when three billion more consumers enter the middle class and easily exploited resources are exhausted. Optimists say not to worry. Technology will adapt, consumption patterns will change, and prices will stabilize or fall. Pessimists look at the trend, contemplate how climate change might devastate traditional food-growing regions, and say–well, I can’t write what they say. But it’s not good.